A Fingertip And A Foot

If Dez's finger stays in bounds against the Giants and Bailey's kick doesn't hook left against Baltimore. Dallas would be 10-4, Giants would be eliminated from playoff contention and we would basically be a lock for the NFC east.

Truly is a game of inches.

So lets think about, is this team really that far away?

For a team missing countless starters, under these circumstances, they've done an incredible job.

I know hindsight is 20/20 but for a team that 'has the worst offensive lien in football' a 'GM that has no idea what he's doing' and a coach 'learning on the job.'

They are 13 inches away from being the best team in east and possibly playing for a first round bye right now.

So, are they really that far away - especially in today's league or parity, I like my teams chances just as good as anybodies in the NFC.

If Bailey's kick goes through the upright against Baltimore, we know the outcome. Dallas wins.

If Cincy catches those passes, do we know the outcome? No. There would have still been a lot of plays and different variables.

THANK YOU! So sick of hearing our win against them get qualified. Who are blank are the bengals?

AJ Green is great, but you telling me he never drops passes? The one dropped at the 5 was on 3rd and goal and there was no guarantee he gets in the endzone.

Newman can't catch cold barefoot in snow.

And why does no one mention Gresham's one handed snag? That was a huge play in the game that he seldom makes. Great athlete, but he has hands like feet. That play alone makes up for some unexpected drops....

Either way, catching and dropping counts and is often the difference.

Carr's INT was a great catch and if he doesn't make it, maybe we lose.

I'll say the same thing I said after the WAS game: it's still a long season. We can easily end up 8-8. But, yeah, it's not all necessarily about the record, anyway. The line between 8-8 and 12-4 is not that significant. We see in the playoffs every year how little that four-game advantage means when it's the team with the worse record that happens to get hot at the end of a season.

I believe the Dallas Cowboys organization is in as good a shape as it's been in since Bill Parcels was here, and I believe JG's best days are still in front of him. He's doing so much right behind the scenes; with luck, it translates to two more wins and at least a mini playoff run leading up to an offseason where we've got a chance to really be contenders in this league for a long while.

True but you also have to think, we probably should have not had any business winning the Browns or Bengals game. Heck, some even say the Steelers game last week. Steelers had every opportunity to win that game and just didn't. It's the way it goes. You will have a few games in the season that if this or that went our way, we win. But then you can't forget the games where those things did go our way and we won. We are where we should be right now.

If Dez's finger stays in bounds against the Giants and Bailey's kick doesn't hook left against Baltimore. Dallas would be 10-4, Giants would be eliminated from playoff contention and we would basically be a lock for the NFC east.

Truly is a game of inches.

So lets think about, is this team really that far away?

For a team missing countless starters, under these circumstances, they've done an incredible job.

I know hindsight is 20/20 but for a team that 'has the worst offensive lien in football' a 'GM that has no idea what he's doing' and a coach 'learning on the job.'

They are 13 inches away from being the best team in east and possibly playing for a first round bye right now.

So, are they really that far away - especially in today's league or parity, I like my teams chances just as good as anybodies in the NFC.

We are just as close to having 4 or 5 more losses as we are to having those 2 more wins.

We are just as close to having 4 or 5 more losses as we are to having those 2 more wins.

Yep, we could've easily lost to Tampa and Carolina. I think this team we're seeing now is different than back then in the first half of the season. We're making crucial defensive plays in the 4th quarter, and Tony has been on a hot streak.

If Dez's finger stays in bounds against the Giants and Bailey's kick doesn't hook left against Baltimore. Dallas would be 10-4, Giants would be eliminated from playoff contention and we would basically be a lock for the NFC east.

Truly is a game of inches.

So lets think about, is this team really that far away?

For a team missing countless starters, under these circumstances, they've done an incredible job.

I know hindsight is 20/20 but for a team that 'has the worst offensive lien in football' a 'GM that has no idea what he's doing' and a coach 'learning on the job.'

They are 13 inches away from being the best team in east and possibly playing for a first round bye right now.

So, are they really that far away - especially in today's league or parity, I like my teams chances just as good as anybodies in the NFC.

The offensive line is poor. No amount of rewriting history will change that.

Woulda shoulda coulda is a fun game, but Dallas lost. They didn't almost win.

let's say that we "coulda, shoulda, woulda" been 16-0. well, so what? what does that mean? what kind of action do you think it should trigger?

the only reason this is a worthwhile discussion is if you frame it the way the front office will frame it once the season is over, which is like this:

"do we have a good team that got unlucky with some losses that broke bad, or do we have a bad team that got lucky with some wins it didn't deserve?"

they need to know what needs to be fixed, how much it would cost and whether the expense would be worth it. if they think this team is one stellar right tackle and a hulking nose tackle away from a super bowl appearance, then they might trade up in the draft or pay big bucks in free agency for those last pieces of the puzzle. but if the holes are too many to plug in one offseason and the stars too few and too old, they might take a longer term approach.

let's say that we "coulda, shoulda, woulda" been 16-0. well, so what? what does that mean? what kind of action do you think it should trigger?

the only reason this is a worthwhile discussion is if you frame it the way the front office will frame it once the season is over, which is like this:

"do we have a good team that got unlucky with some losses that broke bad, or do we have a bad team that got lucky with some wins it didn't deserve?"

they need to know what needs to be fixed, how much it would cost and whether the expense would be worth it. if they think this team is one stellar right tackle and a hulking nose tackle away from a super bowl appearance, then they might trade up in the draft or pay big bucks in free agency for those last pieces of the puzzle. but if the holes are too many to plug in one offseason and the stars too few and too old, they might take a longer term approach.

I think a more logical take is that the league has created an environment where a few dozen plays make the difference between success and failure for almost every team. Even the teams who consistently win 12, 13 games or more have multiple games per season that could have gone either way if not for a play or two. And there's another dozen teams who finish at the 6-10 level and thereabouts who are literally all those couple-dozen plays from somehow qualifying for the playoffs. The margin is razor-thin, and the things that can have you winning or losing those games are too numerous to guess at or manage effectively. It can be coaching, personnel, scheduling, the relative health of your team, the relative health of the teams you're playing, matchups, home or away, do you have a QB?

The best teams manage these factors consistently, and it shows up over multiple seasons. What makes it gut-wrenching is that it's a game of inches in a lot of cases, but that's not how you measure progress. Probabilities say that any team is going to lose it's share of toss-up plays. The best teams find a way to keep a larger percentage of their regular season games out of the toss-up category, and then consistently find a way to win a higher percentage of the toss games they inevitably do get into.

We've done a much better job of the latter this season than we have in a long time, and that's hopeful. We've done a poor job of the former. Romo said it in his interview this week that the team understands that, with all the injuries, they're going to have to win their games by making plays in crunch time every week. This group is mentally tough, and that's how they're winning, but they're not talented enough at this point to win the games going away.

I can live with that. I think the mental toughness part has been lacking since before Parcels, and I couldn't be happier to see it surfacing now. We'll have a challenge against another really, really good offense this weekend. If we survive that, we'll have what's going to be (with the possible exception of the CIN game, under exceptional circumstances) the most mentally-challenging game of the season in WAS. If the team holds up, it's a very, very good sign in my book. We're demonstrating that we can add talent under this current administration. If we're also able to build a team of players who can win a statistically significant number of the toss-up situations every NFL team has to win in order to advance, we'll be in good shape. If we can't, it's a long slog trying to find the solution to this bog we've been in under the last four head coaches.

I'm sorry, but you are being a tad ridiculous.. He said that the finger and the kick leave us at 12-4. And you're contention is that it would not have. It only would have made the percentage chance that we win those games somewhere like 99.99% so you don't "KNOW". We better just shut down the forum guys! we can't talk about any possibilities... nope... no discussion on how close we could be to this record or that with Vin Deisel over here...

You're missing the point. The OP was saying that with a couple of breaks, we might a piece or two away from being a serious contender.

All I'm saying is that with a couple breaks the other way, we might be out of the playoffs playing the draft game already.

The only thing I did initially was say that if we are going to count the breaks that didn't go our way and say that they'd be wins, you can do the same thing the other way and we end up with more losses.

You're missing the point. The OP was saying that with a couple of breaks, we might a piece or two away from being a serious contender.

All I'm saying is that with a couple breaks the other way, we might be out of the playoffs playing the draft game already.

The only thing I did initially was say that if we are going to count the breaks that didn't go our way and say that they'd be wins, you can do the same thing the other way and we end up with more losses.

You can measure, though, in terms of how often good teams win those toss-up games. I agree that looking at a play or two in a game or two isn't a good way to make the point. I also think we're doing a better job under Garrett of winning the games we should win and of at least staying competitive in games where we're overmatched. At least so far this season, anyway.